Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35090197›Full record

ReviewEpilepsia open2022

Antiseizure medication discovery: Recent and future paradigm shifts.

Alan Talevi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Epilepsia open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Alan TaleviLaboratory of Bioactive Research and Development (LIDeB), Faculty of exact Sciences, University of La Plata (UNLP), Buenos Aires, Argentina.ORCID 0000-0003-3178-826X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the ever-increasing number of available options for the treatment of epilepsies and the remarkable advances on the understanding of their pathophysiology, the proportion of refractory patients has remained approximately unmodified during the last 100 years. How efficient are we translating positive outcomes from basic research to clinical trials and/or the clinical scenario? It is possible that fresh thinking and exploration of new paradigms are required to arrive at truly novel therapeutic solutions, as seemingly proven by recently approved first-in-class antiseizure medications and drug candidates undergoing late clinical trials. Here, the author discusses some approximations in line with the network pharmacology philosophy, which may result in highly innovative (and, hopefully, safer and/or more efficacious) medications for the control of seizures, as embodied with some recent examples in the field, namely tailored multi-target agents and low-affinity ligands.

Indexed as

AnticonvulsantsEpilepsyHumansLigandsSeizuresAnticonvulsantsLigandsdisrupting innovationdrug discoveryepilepsyinnovationlow-affinity ligandmulti-targetmulti-target drugsnetwork pharmacologypartial agonistradical innovationsystems pharmacology

Identifiers

PMID35090197
PMCPMC9340309

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.